moonspinner55 Cable-film follow-up to an excellent predecessor about abortion through the years; the theme this time is lesbianism, and the opening segment set in 1961 is outstanding as Vanessa Redgrave deals with the loss of her elderly lover, the coldness of the woman's family and her seeming lack of all options. The short film is a tiny bit over-the-top, but extremely well-acted and sensitively viewed. It dominates this overall look at women dealing with sexual issues, especially as Chloë Sevigny isn't given much to do but smolder in chapter two, and the closer with Ellen DeGeneres and Sharon Stone fails because the actresses are totally unconvincing as lovers who want a child.

TheOtherFool Trio stories about lesbians throughout the years, all living in a certain house (but why that's so important, it never says. And why not have a running gag with it like a crazy neighbour?).Anyway, the first part takes place in the early 60's, with an older woman (Vanessa Redgrave) losing her life companion (a female) to a stroke. They were both living in her lovers (?) house, so now the family comes to claim that... This part is by far the best of the trio.The second story takes place in the early seventees, when being a lesbian is no longer frowned upon and even 'cool'. We follow the blossoming relationship between Linda (Michelle 'Dawsons Creek' Williams) and Amy. Some steamy stuff, but not as intense as the first part.To make it a school-example of anti-climax, there's the third story set in 2000, with Sharon Stone and Ellen DeGeneres as Fran and Kal who decide on getting pregnant (well, Fran anyway). Apparently, it needs to show us homosexuality is now much more accepted than 40 years ago... but did they really have to do it so boring in the final part?If you have any sense, turn it off after 30 minutes, except when you're into Michelle Williams in which case you might find it rewarding to keep on watching for another 30 minutes or so. But stop there!First part: 7/10. Second part: 5/10. Third part: 3/10.Final score: 5/10.

Dfredsparks Vanessa Redgrave moved me to no end in the first segment. a great story for people to go back and reflect on as the battle lines are being drawn on the issue of gay marriage. But the second two segments have not held up as well upon repeated viewings. I often just watch the first segment and then change the channel. The other two are not horrible, but the first ITWCT was stonger across the board.

bob the moo Three tales of lesbian couples having different struggles across three different time periods. In the sixties a lifelong lesbian couple who have never come out find the difficulties that occur due to them having no legal connection to one another. In the seventies a university student who is a feminist faces her friends' disapproval when she falls for a stereotypical `butch john' lesbian. In the nineties an openly gay couple decide to try for child and start looking for sperm.I first heard of this film because I always have time for anything that Nia Long does. This caught my eye on her CV and when it came on TV I watched it. I wasn't sure what to expect but most of it works quite well. As the stories are pretty distinct (the only connection being the house) so I'll deal with them so. The first is easily the best and is the most emotionally involving. It is a little too happy and unreal at the start but the tragic situation that Edith finds herself in because of her love is very moving. The second story is a little less real to me as it deals with a problem within the lesbian community (of which I have no experience to speak of). It is less moving and also a little more explicit and may satisfy those who are only interested in lesbians in terms of male arousal! I don't think it is very sexual or overly done but I didn't think there was too much need for it - regardless of the participants sexuality I didn't think it really added to the subject. However the story again is pretty good and is interesting as it is not an issue I was aware of.The final story is the most optimistic but also the weakest. The `issue' is a lot less serious and the film treats it as such with the whole segment being very light-hearted and bright. It doesn't really add anything to the film and doesn't fit with the first two segments. The cast are pretty much all good. In the first part Redgrave is excellent and her plight is made very real by the strength of her performance. In the second film Sevingy steals the show easily with a good performance. In the third DeGeneres happily underplays and isn't `zany' or `wacky', she is funny but not in an annoying way. Stone is weak because her character simply doesn't fit with her body - far too youthful and carefree to suit Stone. The support add to the feel that this is full of `stars' with Perkins, Giamatti, Long, King and others all doing OK in support.Overall this film starts strong but gets progressively weaker as it goes, with the final section being quite frivolous compared to the emotion of the opening. It is an interesting film but it doesn't quite work as well as it should have done.